View Single Post
  #16  
Old 09-20-2020, 10:37 AM
87tdwagen's Avatar
87tdwagen 87tdwagen is offline
Registered Miscreant
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sunny Ft. Lauderdale
Posts: 1,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diseasel300 View Post
1986 and onward vehicles already have adequate condenser and ideal compressor for R134a. Replacing the expansion valve is necessary for best performance. Using the 80% charging rule on these cars will result in a system that is grossly undercharged with predictably poor performance. Actual system charge with R134a and the correct expansion valve typically winds up 90-95% of the R12 charge (for example, my 350SD calls for 2.9 pounds of R12 [46 ounces], but takes 42 ounces of R134a [91% of the R12 charge] for correct charge. It will blow 42˚F on a 100˚ day on a stock system with only the expansion valve replaced.)

You mentioned the use of the correct expansion valve. The one my car calls for 140 830 04 84 is the same for the 1987 R12 300td as it is for the 94 e320 R134a car. At least in my look-up the expansion valve is used for many models pre R134a and post. I assume that there is no functional difference based on the gas used and the (New) valves are compatible with either system?
__________________
Stable Mates:
1987 300TD 310K mi (Hans)
2008 Jeep Grand Cherokee OM642 165k mi (Benzrokee)
Reply With Quote